<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Linux desktop progress: Innovation vs. power-user backlash ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-23T15:38:02-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Yes, you have it...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3617842]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[You've got the secret to change.  Unless you have to do a major overhaul because of some outside force that is causing the change, do like itadmin says and do it slowly.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3617842]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[rpollard@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 07:08:17 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[That's good for you...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3617828]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I believe they are headed in the right direction with Unity.  They just need to make the techies happy since they are the ones that will be supporting it.But the average user is not going to want to customize anything except their dock by dragging an application on it that they use often.  They don't want to have to go into any .ini, .cfg or any other configuration files and do anything.  If they do they just won't deal with it and move to another OS.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3617828]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[rpollard@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 07:06:18 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[PM7 is great]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3617799]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[It should be solid enough to last most of what MS throws at it but it won't last forever.  MS likes breaking things.You sort of do care if you won't help them.  Otherwise, you would help them.Doesn't matter if it makes a difference in market share.  We need a solid 3rd alternative to OSX and Windows.  I fell in love with Macs when they first came out.  Although it's not perfect, I see so many little things that Apple does that makes a world of difference for the average end user.For a solid 3rd option, we need a user-friendly version of Linux.  That's because they care about the end user experience.  MS just cares about their bottom line and Linux developers care about themselves.  Until they &quot;care&quot; they're never going to understand what is needed for the average joe and it'll always be extremely difficult to use compared to even Windows.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3617799]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[rpollard@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 07:03:14 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Why are we fixing something which isn't broken?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3617070]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I have been programming since 1968.  Like everyone else, when I was young, I was always improving things. One day an old timer pulled me aside and pointed out that even though what I had 'fixed' was much better, had I considered how much it was going to cost to train the rest of the staff to do things the new way? I hadn't.Suddenly I realized that if I was going to fix something, I would also have to be sure not to break things for everyone else. If what I had done was indeed that much better, people would quickly addopt it. And those who found the old way met their needs, they were not inconvenienced by the improvement.My only complaint with Gnome 3 is, &quot;When will the amount of work I have to do to establish a working interface which operates just as the Fedora 13 interface does reach zero?&quot; I have no complaint with any effort to improve the interface, but I also need compatability with Fedora prior to Fedora 15.Thank YouWilliam C FayMember Number: 3622339ACM Professional Member since February 1990]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3617070]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[fedora11a]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 23:40:01 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Vote for efficiency]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3526666]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I want a tool that lets me do my job with a minimum of keystrokes (and especially a minimum of mouse clicks).Think about where Unix/Linux came from for a moment. Developers who wanted maximum power from minimum effort.  Enter 2 char commands like rm, ls, ln, vi, cd.We don't want a new best friend to chat with, we want to get the job done.I have a single icon shutdown button on my desktop because I don't want a conversation about whether &quot;I really want to shutdown&quot;. If I didn't want to shutdown, I would not have pressed the icon!If I want someone to chat with, I will IM somebody or go down to the pub.I want my computer to do useful things with a minimum of instruction.  ]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3526666]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[steve@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 27 Nov 2011 23:52:39 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[missing the point]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3526648]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[the problem is not change. the problem is that gnome and gnome 3 in particular severely lacks customizability. less so that even windows. its just a poor DE. os x really has the best approach of evolutionary change that NEVER has users saying &quot;i hate this new version, im going back to the older OS&quot;. gradual change is the best way for interfaces.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3526648]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[garegin]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 27 Nov 2011 20:43:39 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Thank  you very  much]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3504696]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Well done! Thank  you very much for professional templates and community edition sesli chat   sesli sohbet]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3504696]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[birumut]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 12:59:35 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Tried MEPIS?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3492399]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Of the several distros I have tried, MEPIS Linux comes the closest to what you ask.  The &quot;everyday user&quot; level is fairly intuitive.  Still, the power user has all the tools to which they have become accustomed.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3492399]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Sagax-]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 09:41:54 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Buggous approach]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3491859]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I am a developer but I consider myself an average user on my judgement. My abilities with programming languages have nothing to do with the effort it gets to launch an app. The &quot;number of clicks&quot; that you did mention in the article are not represented in any of the poll options. Efficiency has a different technical meaning.I am an average user and as an average user I strongly believe that both Gnome3 and Unity have big problems with ergonomics. They are not easy to use, they are not easy to learn and definitely not intuitive at all. I can actually go on and say they are poor imitations of Apple products which I am not a big fan of either. This definitely has nothing to do with my habits from my past operating systems. I found use of mouse intuitive, years after using non-visual operative systems.Replacing a system of gnome-on-top-of-x gui is a nice approach and can solve many Linux problems of the future. I as a slightly advanced user welcome it and as an average user welcome the possibilities that it will bring to my everyday life in future.Also as an advanced user I understand the bugs in these newly made systems are natural part of this development model. As an average user I have already got used to them as well.I made my mind about these two long before I heard about Mr. Trovald's  comment. And for the record I have never been a fan of KDE or QT ever. Full stop.All the avalanche of accusations in the article are unfair. I don't like the recent changes exactly for the reasons I am clearly stating. You can not put words in my mouth. It is not about my closed mind. It is not about 10 hours in front of the screen. It is not because I can not see the future. It is not because I am in a hurry to see a matured high quality product. It is because these products suffer from bad flaws in design. It is as simple as that.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3491859]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[bornbyforce]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2011 08:06:23 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Customizability, modularity and applications]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489868]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The main reason why I have not moved to Unity and Gnome Shell is their lack of customizability and flexibility. They have this thing of 'you have to use our top panel with the global menu whether you like it or not...you have to use that launcher...' etc. These simple choices are the ones that made Linux different. Offering a good interface and setting does not mean forcing it. They should offer what they think is a good set of defaults and then allow for customization like what the elementary project is doing in Pantheon, not to force the global menu on you 'even if you don't want it otherwise go get lost and use your 'old-fashioned' desktop'. I'm sure Gnome Shell and Unity will be successful in some time but they are not for me. For now I use XFCE and enlightenment and hope XFCE don't do a similar thing in 5.0. I'm also eagerly awaiting elementary os Luna.   I haven't really complained about KDE because I am not really a fan of it and was not a Linux user in the days of KDE 3.5 (which means I am a fairly new user, only 1.5 years). Another thing, KDE was mainly criticised for bugs from what I've read and Shell and Unity are criticised upon being how they are]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489868]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[yaseennoorani]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 01:51:11 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[How much change is too much?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489742]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[While I can see both sides of the efficiency debate (i.e., efficiency versus ease of use) and the concerns about removing flexibility and options versus keeping things simple in order to meet the needs of basic users without confusing them, I think it's important to consider another factor: the investment of time and resources required for people who are experienced with a particular desktop (or any other bit of technology) to adapt to significant changes. Yes, I know that technology changes, that the days of mastering the tools of one's trade once and for all have been replaced by a need for lifelong learning, etc., etc.  That's all well and good, but there are a few issues that all software (and hardware) designers need to keep in mind when considering major changes to a product's user interface or general behavior.  Learning to use a new tool, or a new UI for a familiar tool, requires an investment of time on the part of the user.  That investment is often larger for people who have experience with previous versions of the tool, because they have to break existing habits in order to acquire new ones.  This situation can actually make it harder for a formerly proficient user to adapt to the new UI than for a brand new user to acquire familiarity with it.  When one couples this with the fact that as humans age we tend to learn new skills less quickly, and need to invest more effort to become proficient at a task, dramatic changes in a tool or its UI can be a significant disadvantage for experienced users. Ultimately, any changes to a tool or UI should offer enough productivity gains (through increased performance or efficiency) to offset the lost time and productivity that will be required for users familiar with older tools or interfaces to become equally skilled with the new tool or interface.  If the change isn't great, it doesn't require a great deal of increased efficiency to make it worthwhile.  If the change is profound, it should offer great improvements to productivity or efficiency.  Anything else just doesn't make sense.  Thus, the fundamental question should be, does GNOME 3 offer substantial enough improvements over earlier versions in some key area to make adapting to it worthwhile?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489742]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[rhmccool]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 13:06:04 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You Just Proved You Don't Know the First Thing About Linux]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489531]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[There have always been people who promoted one desktop over another. There have always been people who thought that certain desktops were too bloated or didn't have enough features (not bloated enough  ) or were too cryptic or whatever. This is just about a group of people who used a certain desktop not liking current changes to it. It's similar to when people didn't like the GUI changes in Windows Vista. It's not really a big deal. There are always alternatives in Linux. Alternatives are not so plentiful with Windows (although there's always the Emerge Desktop).]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489531]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[CFWhitman]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 06:25:05 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[I love it]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489479]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[All the 'Linux is perfect&quot; goofballs are whining about a their holy grail. What happened? Is Linux not so perfect any longer?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489479]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[imsoscareed]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 04:40:44 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[New code means new bugs]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489442]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I use Linux, because I need to have a reliable system. I won't even look at a new desktop until it has been through three iterations. By then, the bug count should be low enough to have a productive system.Ian]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489442]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[i.hilliard@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 00:32:10 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Hmmm.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489391]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Part of IE's issues [on older versions] is the lack of security or standard. The newer version are quite solid [wouldn't say perfect]. I'm using PageMaker 7 in Windows 64-bit and it works fine - I ignored any &quot;incompatible&quot; warnings. Didn't find any.I tell people, if you are use to something, why switch? If they switch to Google Chrome, I wouldn't care - but I wouldn't help them either!At this point making Linux &quot;user friendly&quot; won't make much of a difference. It has a huge climb to get anywhere and if it hasn't done much in the last 10 years , I can't seeing anything change in the near future.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489391]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Gisabun]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:29:39 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[You're welcome!]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489377]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I don't work in my company's support group, but I'm near enough to there and on the que that I pitch in sometimes. For that reason, at work, I decided to use what they use. Honestly, it's made me dislike Microsoft a lot less. Just at work I run boxes with XP, 7, 2k8r2, Ubuntu and regular Squeeze, all for different purposes, all with the main browsers, various remote work and virtualization setups, and I try to alternate between them as much as I can. I also try to not get too used to any one way of doing things as I can. I think my help should get someone through a problem, not require them to take a class so they can finish a project.Back to the topic, I think the right thing for innovators in Linux to do would be to look at what the power users are doing with their work and design GUIs to do all of that, THEN default it down to harmless for the new users so they can't hurt themselves. Why can't someone that knows nothing about their operating system set up a simple website in a FOSS WYSIWYG editor, then (using only the GUI) install LAMP, secure it and get their work hosted (publicly or privately) without having to google around get scared? There are SO many great things anybody can do with the great tools we have available to us. Why do they have to be so hard to configure and use?I read a tweet the other day that (with regard to education) we need to stop asking &quot;How intelligent is the child&quot; and start asking &quot;How is the child intelligent.&quot; Let's not assume new users are stupid and incapable. Let Linux make EVERYTHING easy for them.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489377]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[matttimpson@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:27:46 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Ya]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489376]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[If She uses Firefox for 98% of her usage, then she could technically use any OS out there right now. WQhether Windows, Linux or a Mac. Doesn't mean much.The question is if she actually used Windows itself - would she miss it. If she was a gamer [i.e, spend $20+ to buy a commercial game] or professional work [video editing, graphics], would she miss Windows then?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489376]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Gisabun]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:24:57 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Do you want to try and make sense, there?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489375]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[If a user doesn't need the functionality, the user doesn't need to use it. Breaking functionality for people who do use it is just stupid.But you are correct: In no way can the definitions for &quot;functionality&quot; and &quot;everyday user&quot; be the same. These are entirely different things. Doesn't matter if they are my definitions or not.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489375]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[seanferd]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:16:52 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[HELLO! HELLO!...it's not about change, but Inconvenience]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489390]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[First users should determine their desktop, it is the users that have to live with it. Second people even Linux users use computer TO DO OTHER THINGS that they want to do quickly and efficiently. Having to cast about to do simple tasks is really a pain in the BUTT! Making the user have to rip out and reconfigure the whole desktop does not make you friends.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489390]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[mikifinaz1@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:09:02 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[My Alltime favorite desktop]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489277]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[the combiz 3D desktop cube is the best desktop I've ever used in 30 years of computing. Nothing is even close.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-347676-3489277]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[bdweiner@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 12:28:33 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

